On 11/2/09, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: > Matt Amos wrote: >> the CC BY-SA portion would imply that the screenshot >> would be CC BY-SA, but the license on the "other layer" of the image >> wouldn't allow that. > > Correct. I think that CC-BY-SA creates an incentive for the secretive > data provider to, instead of combining his own data and CC-BY-SA data > server-side and delivering it to the customer, furnish the customer with > a bit of software and feed him CC-BY-SA and proprietary data through > separate channels. That way, the data is combined on the users' > computer, leaving him user with a dead-end undistributable (but usable!) > lump of data.
isn't that a bug in any "share-alike" license which uses redistribution as the trigger? all this complexity - it's enough to make someone want to PD everything ;-) cheers, matt _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
